Piloting of Blended Learning: Implementation and Benefits

• Authors: Biljana Vitošević , Anita Janković , Zdravko Vitošević

Abstracts

EN

This paper is based on piloting of blended learning as a transformative learning process in order to keep pace with technological innovation. Our redesign of the course was the intention of the use of blended learning as a tool for high-quality, meaningful and longer lasting knowledge, improvements in learning outcomes and greater engagement of students in learning. We chose Moodle platform as a highly sophisticated learning management system with many modules and its possibilities of application in the learning context to develop the online component as a supplement to classroom lessons. After conducting an analysis of the course and a questionnaire, we concluded that students use all the segments of the online component and they become more engaged, their assignments end on time and at the end they would express their satisfaction with the course redesign. Using the T-test for large independent samples there is statistically significantly better performance in the final test (p<0.01) for students who have used Moodle compared to students from the previous generation attending traditional classes, while in the theoretical part of the exam there are higher grades instead of middle, but without statistical significance (p>0.05), which leads us to the view that blended learning helps, above all, average students to upgrade and advance their knowledge. Considering that many of our student are athletes, blended learning is a good choice for them as they are professionally engaged in sports and they can follow the course and complete their assignments in addition to sports commitments. This piloting will serve as a parameter for future use of blended learning to be more adapted to the needs and objectives of students and eliminate any disadvantages.

Keywords

EN

blended learning; Moodle; higher education; sports science

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek
• Journal: The New Educational Review
• Year: 2014
• Volume: 36
• Pages: 104-117

Dates

published

2014

Contributors

author

Biljana Vitošević

• University of Kosovska Mitrovica

author

Anita Janković

• University of Kosovska Mitrovica

author

Zdravko Vitošević

• University of Kosovska Mitrovica

References

• Chen, Z.Z., Stelzer, T., & Gladding, G. (2010). Using multimedia modules to better prepare students for introductory physics lectures. Physics Education Research, 6 (1).
• Desmarais, M.C. (2010). Just-in-Time Knowledge and User Interface Design for Effective Hybrid Learning. Handbook of Research on Hybrid Learning Models: Advanced Tools, Technologies, and Applications, 174.
• Fong, J., Kwan, R., Wang, F.L. (2008). Hybrid learning and education. SpringerVerlag Berlin Heidelberg.
• Garrison, R. & Kanuka,H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. Internet and Higher Education 7, 95-105.
• Garrison, R. & Vaughan, H. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles and guidelines. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Groben B., Prohl R. (2012). Good practice methods in Physical EducationCooperative Learning. Journal of Physical Education & Health, vol. 1(1), 43-52.
• Hummel, H.G.K. (2006). Feedback Model to Support Designers of Blended Learning Courses. IRRODL, 7 (3).
• Laster, S., G. Otte, A.G. Picciano, and S. Sorg. Redefining blended learning. Presentation at the 2005 Sloan-C Workshop on Blended Learning, Chicago, IL, April 18, 2005.
• Leser, R, Baca, A, Uhlig J. (2011). Effectiveness of multimedia-supported education in practical sports courses. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine 10, 184-192.
• Littlejohn, A. & Pegler, C. (2007). Preparing for Blended e-Learning. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis.
• Makhdoom NF., Khoshhal KI, Algaidi S., Heissam K., Zolaly MA. (2013). “Blended learning” as an effective teaching and learning strategy in clinical medicine: a comparative cross-sectional university-based study. Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences 8 (1), 12-17.
• Martin-Blas T, Serrano-Fernandez A. (2009). The role of new technologies in the learning process: Moodle as a teaching tool in Physics. Computers & Education 52, 35-44.
• Mayadas, F. and Picciano, A.G. (2007). Blended Learning and Localness: The Means and the End. Journal of asynchronous learning networks, 11 (1).
• Moskal, P., Dziuban CH., Hartman J. (2013). Blended learning: A dangerous idea?. Internet and Higher Education 18: 15-23.
• Owston, R., York, D, Murtha, S. (2013). Student perceptions and achievement in a university blended learning strategic initiative. Internet and Higher Education, 18, 38-46.
• Sayed, M. and Baker, F. (2014). Blended Learning Barriers: An Investigation, Exposition and Solutions. Journal of Education and Practice, 5 (6), 81-85.
• Smythe,M. (2012).Toward a framework for evaluating blended learning. In M. Brown, M. Hartnett&T. Stewart (Eds.), Future challenges, sustainable futures. Proceedings ascilite Wellington 2012, 854-858.
• Staker, H. & Horn, M. (2012). Classifying K-12 blended learning. Innosight Institute, Inc. www.innosightinstitute.org.\

Identifiers

DOI

10.15804/tner.14.36.2.08

Biblioteka Nauki

2031644